C + K Zones

[Sean Clark]

Hoplon I remember, but never played.

I think a more left field subject area might be lucrative especially if a figure range is produced.

Fall of Rome
Troy
Greek City States
1st Crusades (cavalry might be useful in Longships?)

[Colonel Kilgore]

I've always been inspired by Troy, but struggled with how to game it meaningfully. Perhaps focusing on the heroic combats, with the rest of the armies as supporting actors? But then that risks turning into a skirmish...

Simon

[martin goddard]

The present  PP ranges are quite small. They focus on biblical (Midianite/Egyptian)   and Rome (Parthian, Roman, German).
Maybe a central rule book (including one period) with pdf supplement for each other period?
Then players would be restricted to fighting within a supplement.
Probably needs about 10 supplements.  That excludes the Aztec and mound building Indians.


martin

[Colonel Kilgore]

Maybe try to avoid creating more sculpting work for yourself on this one, Martin? Ancients are now very well served in 15mm as it is, so you may have a partial answer to your earlier question on primary focus?

And if you do go for Early Imperial Rome and "friends", I have an excuse to paint up my Ancient Britons at last

Simon

[martin goddard]

One possible problem with CK is how many figures a player needs to get "on board".
Players usually get on board for various reasons.

Here are what might be the main ones.

1.Can I afford the figures needed?
2. Can i get the figures needed painted?
3. Are there enough units so that the loss of a couple is not a game ender?
4.Does it look like an army?
5. Does the table and scenery look good?
6.Will a normal army usually beat weird ones?
7. Can the game be played again and again and have new set of challenges each time?
8.Is luck a minor or major part?
9. Will my chums play it or do i need both armies initially?
10. Are there things that make it different to what is already out there?
11. Can I use my existing armies?
12. Does the title sound good?
13. Does the writing team have any idea about warfare or do they use the term faction, fast play and semi skirmish rules.



martin

[Colonel Kilgore]

With grids, and the ability to use any size of base, I think that many many players will have armies already. Alongside PBI, this could be your greatest "crossover" ruleset / period opportunity, Martin!

Simon

[SimonC]

just for my 2p.

Ancients is a rabbit hole - unless you have a burning desire to produce a massive range - probably stick to what you have. So Romans vs Germans, there are plenty of things to expand it with. The best thing about PP is the game narrative and I'd stick to that ... not the enevitable line up and slog. Think more like Infamy!, Infamy! in which they spend a long time telling the story and the battle.

We don't need another WRG clone (looking at you ADLG) but what you can do is be inclusive to all those players with existing armies.

Simon

[martin goddard]

Well, I have a German and Roman army for play testing.
Stewart has armies too.
I expect that most of the play testers already have 15mm armies.
That makes it very easy/low cost to get started.

A possible problem might be if the grid is more complicated than a standard square one.
This problem is made worse by the fact that the grid itself will probably change under play testing.
This could be overcome with grouping of squares.  e.g central squares are in pairs side by side. Flank squares are into 4 in a  2x2 grid.

Assuming a 5x3 table.

central zone = 3 pairs of squares side by side.6 rows from table edge to table edge.
Flank zones= 3 squares of 4 smaller squares per flank. That really is not clear.  Needs a diagram.

This gives 24 zones in total.


martin

[Stewart 46A]

Here are pictures of my factions
Italians and something else

[Colonel Kilgore]

Very colourful, Stewart. There is that certain something about Ancients, isn't there?

Simon

[Stewart 46A]

Simon , not really my period, i can count on one hand the number of ancients games i have played.


stewart

[owaincaesarius]

Happily whilst I have a few "ancient" armies, I also have some without contemporary enemies so plenty of scope for me to buy and paint more figures. I do have a horse archers host gap in my collection, and a paucity of elephants too for that matter. Just saying.

[Moggy]

For my take on this from someone whose initial entry into figure wargaming back in 197??? was with ancients (don't recall the rulesets used). Re-started in 1980s with WRG 6th Edition and played many different rulesets since.

I feel that no matter how it is broken down into specific time zones there isn't much difference between them. After all it boils down to one bunch of guys wanting to hit stab and shoot at another group trying to do the same to them. I know it sounds daft but some of the most 'funnest' games have been playing completely different period armies against each other or totally different geographical games such as Early Egyptians Vs Aztecs or medieval Europeans. With PP rules all having a certain "vagueness" quite deliberately this allows for this.

As someone who enjoys the way BB plays out it can, with tweaks for specific troop types such the highly demanded Elephants and chariots, be a good set of rules to use. On restarting playing again a few year ago my club had a preponderance of people how use FOG.  As much as it is a reasonable set of rules I felt it was the rules being played rather than the game!  Since then I have put my mongol horde (also cunningly disguised as various other armies such as Allans etc - it covered almost 1000+ years of history., to rest in the shed. 

To be honest I felt DBA a far better ruleset and feel it is too easy to get bogged down in the minutiae of the relative merits of specific troop types. Try playing ancients using BB. I think you will find it works just as well. Ok remove the cannon and replace with ballista and Spiders . Use the elephants as the rules dictate for cavalry but have an element for them going on the rampage and you have a wonderful ruleset for almost any ancient period.

Sorry if this offends any purists out there but I would far rather have fewer different rulesets that work well rather than a plethora of mediocre products that add little not already catered for.  In addition it would be one less ruleset I am trying to keep clear the 'whats and wherefores' straight in my mind.


Cheers

Derek

[Colonel Kilgore]

Derek,

I am very upset.

How could I properly field my Veteran fully-armoured Extra-Heavy Cavalry cataphracts dual-armed with lance and composite bow that win all my games for me (due to my superior generalship)?

Simon

[martin goddard]

Don't worry Simon.
That is covered under rule 8c "Ways to win without any tactics". There are 12  sections a,b,c,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m.  I withdrew section d because it required covering your own army with a cloth until it got into contact. It gets stuck on the lances etc.

martin